We pass the complaints along, but the response is usually "Corporate insists we do this, we hate it too, apparently it makes people buy more drinks".
In practice, at least from the data I've gathered, it drives people away.
It would really depend on the venue, but I managed and worked in a few bars and clubs in the mid 2000s and the daytime crowd preferred more quiet, but then in the evening, if the music was soft, there was a perception that the bar was “dead” or had fewer people tha. It actually did. A loud bar with few people gets more interest from the potential patrons because it’s perceived as more lively and crowded than it may actually be. Then it creates a self-fulfilling prophecy and actually becomes more lively and crowded. When your business is based on customer volume, quiet and contemplative is a fast way to go out of business. Exceptions are high end, romantic martini bars selling $18 drinks or scotch bars selling high end spirits to a discerning clientele. For your average brew-pub or standard “bar,” silence equals death. You can see this anywhere there is a strip of bars and clubs, the quiet places are the ones not selling as much. Most people go to bars at night for the purpose of socializing and having fun. Most bar patrons don’t associate “fun” with quiet. Anyone that has worked in the bar business knows that you make more money with loud than you do with quiet — with some exceptions of course.
Restaurants on the other hand, in my experience, quiet does better for the restaurants that have been around awhile, while loud and lively tends to prop up the newer places because the “energy” reinforces the “hype” around perceived popularity.
That they don't buy a music license is a cost saving measure.
They're ok when they first open, but after a year or two get a bit of a run down feeling.
I also walk past one of my local ones occasionally at 9:30 in the morning, there's always a few old men already drinking pints of lager in there, it's sad.
The worst part by far is how they never sit together, they all sit individually alone.
There are also some really excellent ones such as one I found near the south downs. Can't exactly remember where but it had two roaring log fires in it. Great Malvern one is nearly as good.
I have a local Wetherspoons and go occasionally. If it's quiet I'll stay. But sometimes it's unbearably loud just because it's packed with raucous people in a large, acoustically non-absorbent room, to the point that I hear "crackling" in my ears.
It's still much better than the pub next to it, which serves food I like, but is painfully loud all the time inside - even when it's completely empty. That's not acoustics. They play music at a hideous volume, and won't turn it down even when the place is empty - "company policy". I listen to music on headphones much of the day, sometimes quite loud. So it's not like I dislike music. Being the only two customers in a huge pub and unable to hear each other talk seems ridiculous to me.
We used to go regularly, for the food. Don't go any more - because of the music volume.
Another publike food place locally was really nice when we first went, shortly after it opened. It's become louder and louder each time we've visited - and now sadly that place is vetoed because of the volume too.
Again, it's because they play music ridiculously loud. It's lost the charm which I think was its selling point when they opened, and we won't go back.
Well, we joked we might go back wearing industrial ear defenders to make a point :)
At a fourth pub I went to an informal business meeting recently. It was afternoon, and not many customers yet. We had to ask them to turn down the music repeatedly just to hear each other.
Seems to be a theme. I'm not sure why they do it, because I doubt their staff or the other customers enjoy it much either.
Places serving food have piped music so you finish your meal more quickly so they sell more covers; you're unlikely to sit around chatting afterwards with music playing.
They also clear plates at the earliest chance providing an enhanced social pressure to finish.
One of the things there's always a whole section on is timing: every single interaction has a time-window in which it must occur. You must be greeted within (t1), you must be seated within (t2). Plates must be cleared within (t3), you must have a 'table touch' (is everything ok with your food?) within (t4), etc.
Some discrete note-taking is often needed (descriptions of all serving staff are required too). We're pretty good at it by now, but have been 'rumbled' once. You can tell when it happens—suddenly you start getting offered the opportunity to try all the different wines they have, for free, given free desserts. Of course it doesn't matter as the meal is paid for, and often slows down the service!
My pet hate is when I'm asked questions while I'm actually eating and I'm expected to answer with a mouth full of food.
I always dreamed of a restaurant that has call buttons on the table, like in a plane or hospital.
A lot of Japanese and Korean restaurants (and maybe more) have exactly that.
I definitely understand that this can be very annoying, but like I said, there are tradeoffs to both. Being a bit socially anxious myself, I prefer not to have to compete with the other diners for the server's attention, so the polling model is better for me.
as an aside, when I go to nicer restaurants I find that the servers tend to be more skilled/graceful. I don't know exactly how they do it, but they always seem to come by at the perfect moment to check whether the food is okay without interrupting a bite/conversation.
in theory, call buttons would be pretty nice, but I think some people would find it to cheapen the experience.
This is much preferred to a manager only hearing about a problem after all the food has been eaten or the customer has sat staring at a plate with unsatisfactory food on it while their companions eat (making everyone less comfortable as generally humans don’t like to eat when others haven’t had the opportunity to).
I assumed it was to cut costs for people who complain at the end to try and get free food.
Practically speaking, though, dpeck is right... shortly after the food is dropped, the waiter should confirm the meal is to the customer's expectations. This is also the chance for customers to ask for condiments, get a replacement fork for the one they dropped, etc. Nothing worse than sitting in front of a hot meal you can't eat and being unable to get the waiter's attention.
That would be "Waiter come taste the soup":
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094898/crazycredits?item=cz000...
More seriously, it all depends on the "level" of service, and - ultimately - on the ratio waiters/served people, which is usually between 1/6-1/10 (excellent service) and 1/25-1/30 (scarce or lacking service).
Even better, one pub didn't have music at all. It was the best pub in town, and that's not just my opinion because it was one of the busiest pubs.
I wish it were like that again.